Board of Com'rs of Iowa Drainage Dist. No. 1. v. Wilkins Co
| Decision Date | 15 June 1909 |
| Docket Number | 17,707 |
| Citation | 51 So. 91,125 La. 127 |
| Parties | BOARD OF COM'RS OF IOWA DRAINAGE DIST. NO. 1. v. WILKINS CO |
| Court | Louisiana Supreme Court |
On Rehearing, January 3, 1910. Rehearing Considered.
Appeal from Fifteenth Judicial District Court, Parish of Calcasieu Winston Overton, Judge.
Action by the Board of Commissioners of Iowa Drainage District No. 1 against the Wilkins Company. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Affirmed.
Pujo Moss & Miller, for appellant.
McCoy Moss & Knox, for appellee.
Plaintiff seeks to compel defendant to comply with a contract whereby it agreed to do certain dredging in consideration of the delivery to it of bonds, to be issued by plaintiff, of the par value of $ 19,000. Defendant admits the contract, and alleges its willingness to comply therewith, provided that the bonds which it is to receive are found to be valid; but it alleges that, for a variety of reasons, which are stated, the bonds are invalid, and, in that contention, it is joined by the Orange Land Company, Limited, which has intervened for that purpose. The suit is, frankly, an amicable one, in which all the parties before the court are interested in having a judgment rendered in favor of plaintiff, and yet it is expected that such judgment will establish a basis for stare decisis, which will be binding on this court with respect to the rights of persons who have adverse interests, but who are not here represented. Moreover, the judgment, whether it is so expected or not, will be regarded as establishing a precedent for other drainage districts, created and to be created, and for the public at large in its dealings with such districts, and with other organizations similar in character. The court is not, therefore, at liberty to deal with the matter as though it were one involving private interests, alone, which might be regulated by consent of the parties. Plaintiff is a public corporation which moves and has its being solely within the limits of the law of its creation, and, by conferring upon it the power to incur debt and to levy and collect taxes for the payment of the same, the state has imposed upon the courts the obligation of seeing to it (so far as the matter may fall within their jurisdiction), for the protection of its own credit and of the rights of its citizens, that its creature does not travel beyond the limits thus fixed.
The Constitution (article 281, as amended, pursuant to Act No. 122, p. 207, of 1906) provides that:
"Drainage districts, through the boards of commissioners thereof, may incur indebtedness and issue negotiable bonds therefor, payable, in principal and interest, out of, and not to exceed, in principal and interest, the aggregate amount to be raised by said annual contributions during the period for which the same are levied."
In the instant case, the board of commissioners submitted to the qualified voters a proposition to vote a specified tax, of 25 cents per acre, upon the land lying in the district, for 13 years, and to authorize the incurring of an indebtedness of $ 30,000, to be represented by bonds, bearing interest at 5 per cent. per annum. The taxpayers were informed that the funds to be derived from the tax would be used, exclusively: (1) For the extinguishment of the debt; (2) in paying ...
To continue reading
Request your trial